Smith v The Queen [1970] HCA 48

Smith v The Queen [1970] HCA 48

The amended presentment, as limited by particulars and by the trial judge's directions, sufficiently charged one conspiracy with Mitchell to defraud the Bank by fraudulent devices resulting in payments to Mitchell or his companies. The other procedural and evidentiary complaints disclosed no ground warranting special leave. The trial judge had a discretion in the joint conspiracy trial to direct the jury to consider verdicts against accused persons separately and successively, and that course involved no error of law in the circumstances.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal Against a Judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal of Victoria Upholding Conviction
Outcome
Application for special leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['conspiracy to Cheat and Defraud' 'presentment and Particulars' 'jury Directions and Verdict Procedure' 'special Leave to Appeal' 'use of Charts in Complex Criminal Trials' 'reopening a Criminal Case']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['conspiracy to Cheat and Defraud' 'presentment and Particulars' 'jury Directions and Verdict Procedure' 'special Leave to Appeal' 'use of Charts in Complex Criminal Trials' 'reopening a Criminal Case']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Law Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal Against a Judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal of Victoria Upholding Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the amended presentment, as limited by particulars, was demurrable or duplicitous.' 'Whether the trial judge erred by allowing use of a chart recording complicated cheque transactions proved by other evidence.' 'Whether a prejudicial remark during evidence required discharge of the jury.' "Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to allow the applicant's case to be reopened to rebut a dock statement by another accused." 'Whether the conviction was against the evidence and the weight of evidence.' 'Whether the trial judge coerced the jury by not discharging it or by not telling it it was not obliged to reach verdicts.' 'Whether, in a joint conspiracy trial, the judge could direct the jury to consider verdicts against accused persons separately and successively.']

Ratio Decidendi

The amended presentment, as limited by particulars and by the trial judge's directions, sufficiently charged one conspiracy with Mitchell to defraud the Bank by fraudulent devices resulting in payments to Mitchell or his companies. The other procedural and evidentiary complaints disclosed no ground warranting special leave. The trial judge had a discretion in the joint conspiracy trial to direct the jury to consider verdicts against accused persons separately and successively, and that course involved no error of law in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application for special leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Application for special leave to appeal refused.']